METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study, patients received flexible doses of Vortioxetine for a period of six months. All participants were assessed at baseline and scheduled for monitoring at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. Depression severity was assessed using Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale. The Perceived Deficiency Questionnaire (PDQ-5) assessed the perceived cognitive difficulties in concentration, executive functioning, and memory. The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC) was used to assess the patients' quality of life. Side effects of vortioxetine were monitored using the Antidepressant Side-Effect Checklist (ASEC).
RESULTS: Patients experienced a reduction in MADRS scores from 29.89 ± 5.997 at baseline to 11.59 ± 4.629 by Week 24. The PDQ-5 scores showed significant change from Week-4, whereas the EORTC role, emotional, and cognitive functioning scores showed a significant change from Week 2 onwards. CGI-Severity scores decreased from a baseline of 4.39 ± 0.746 to 2.41 ± 1.085 by Week 24. During the 24-Weeks of therapy, around three-quarters of the patients (73.3%) had one or more adverse events reported on the ASEC. The most frequently reported TEAEs were dry mouth, insomnia, somnolence, and headache, with more than a 30% incidence rate.
CONCLUSION: Vortioxetine seems promising in the management of depression and enhancement of cognitive function and quality of life of cancer patients with Major Depressive Disorder.
.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among medical students from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) in UKM Medical Center. A total of 273 students have consented to participate and completed self-reported questionnaires encompassing sociodemographic information, the Short Version Smartphone Addiction Scale (SAS-SV), the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS), the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF) and the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (RSES). Sociodemographic data, SIAS score, WHOQOL-BREF score and the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale score were treated as independent variables. Smartphone addiction Scale score was treated as the dependent variable. Bivariate analysis was used to explore the relationship between independent and dependent variables using the Fisher exact test, Pearson Chi-Square and Pearson correlation coefficient. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to analyze the variables with a p-value of < 0.05 from the Pearson correlation coefficient test.
RESULTS: The percentage of excessive smarphone use among UKM medical students is 48%. The bivariate analysis showed that excessive smartphone use has a small but significant positive correlation with social anxiety (r = 0.173, p = 0.004) and negative correlations with physical health (r = -0.133, p = 0.028), psychological wellbeing (r =-0.135, p = 0.026), social relationships (r = -0.232, p = 0.001), environment (r = -0.260, p = 0.001) and self-esteem (r = -0.128, p = 0.035). In the multiple regression analysis, a better environment predicted a reduced risk for smartphone addiction (β = -0.233, p = 0.013).
CONCLUSION: Almost half of the students were found to have smartphone overdependence. Excessive smartphone use has shown a significant relationship with an increased risk for social anxiety, reduction in self-esteem, and quality of life among medical students. A closer look into the possible intervention is needed in the future to curb the negative effects arising from excessive smartphone use.